Yet
it’s Corporate-Media built on weakened Journalism that still REFUSE

To
talk about where the real blood is,

Or
why the realities behind the headlines are never mentioned.

Why
are hundreds of thousands sacrificed daily?

to
keep illegal-SECRETS secret?

It’s
simple really ­

Everything-here’s
been built on lies!

Nothing’s
working and hasn’t since the early 1960’s.

The
filthy-rich ought to be on the chopping blocks’ of history

And
they know it!

That’s
why we have the Police-State

Because
without brute force, the Revolution

Would
instantly begin here and everywhere else,

All
over again…

Ask
yourself why so much of what you know today has had to come from
overseas first? Even after it leaks out, the media here still tries
to hide that too! RT, PRESS-TV and many other sources that inform the
rest of the planet, are denied to the Amerikans who still refuse to
look beyond the headlines, the games, or any of the myriad
distractions that are all their lives consist of now.

CENSORSHIP
and thought-crimes are real today: And the Outlaws are still trying
to justify PRE-CRIME too—because everyone knows the lids are coming
off—of everything that’s been done to us since the blatant murder
of JFK.

Take
a Look at what’s already been done

to
the U.S. Constitution!

Beginning
@ 3min 07 sec: “Even
when people can recognize tyranny and oppression, they still usually
talk about working within the system: The same system that’s
responsible for the tyranny and the oppression. People want to
believe that the system will, sooner or later provide ‘justice’.

The
last thing they want to consider is that they should
illegally-resist: That if they want to achieve justice, they must
become criminals and terrorists; which is what anyone who resists
‘legal-injustice’, is automatically labeled. But history shows
all too well that those who fight for freedom and justice—almost
always do so illegally, i.e., without the permission of the
ruling-class.

Who
Watches the Watchmen?

If
politicians think they have the right to impose any “law” they
want, and cops have the attitude that as long as it’s called “law”
they will enforce it! What is there to prevent complete tyranny? Not
the consciences of the lawmakers or their hired thugs, obviously. And
not any election or petition to the politicians: When tyrants define
what counts as ”LAW” then by definition it is up to the
law-breakers to combat tyranny.

Pick
any example of the abuse of power, whether it’s the fascists
so-called War on Drugs, the police thuggery that’s become so
common; the random stops and searches that are now so routinely
carried out in the name of ‘security’ such as at airports,
border-check-points, that aren’t even at the border,
sobriety-check-points and so-on or any other example.

Now
ask yourself the uncomfortable question: If
it’s wrong for cops to do these things, doesn’t that imply that
the people have a right to resist such actions? And
of course state mercenaries don’t take kindly to being resisted,
even non-violently. If you question their “right” to detain you,
interrogate you, search you, invade your home and so-on: You are very
likely to be tasered, physically-assaulted, kidnapped, put-in-a-cage
or shot.

If
a cop decides to treat you like live-stock, whether he does it
legally or not, you will usually have only two options: submit or
kill the cop. You can’t “resist a cop just-a-little” and get
away with it. He will always call in more of his fellow gang-members,
until you are subdued or dead. Basic logic dictates that you either
have an obligation to “let” law-enforcers have their way with you
or you have the right to stop them from doing so ­ which will
almost always require killing them.

Politely
asking Fascists to not be FASCISTS

Has
a very poor track-record throughout history.

Consider
the recent Indiana Supreme Court Ruling, which declared that if a cop
tries to illegally-enter-your-home; it’s against the law for you to
do anything to stop him. Aside from the patent absurdity of it, that
amounts to giving thugs with badges permission to break the law ­
it makes it a crime for you to defend yourself against a criminal, if
he has a badge. Consider the ramifications of that attitude.

There
were once some words written on a piece of parchment, those words now
known as the fourth amendment that said that you have the right to
be free from unreasonable search and seizures at the hands of
government agents. In Indiana today what could that possibly mean?

The
message from the ruling-class is quite clear and utterly insane. It
amounts to this: “We don’t have the right to invade your home
without ‘probable-cause’, but if we do—you have no right to
stop us and we have the right to arrest you if you try.”

Why
not apply that to the rest of the Bill of Rights

while
we’re at it?

‘You
have the right to say what you want but if we use violence

To
shut you up, you have to let us.’ I can personally attest to the
fact that - that is the attitude that the U.S. so-called Department
of Justice (maintains).
Or maybe you have the right to have guns, but if we try to illegally
and forcibly disarm you, and you resist, we have the right to kill
you. Ask Randy Weaver or the Branch Davidians about that one.

You
have the right to not testify against yourself. But when we coerce
you into ‘confessing’ and call it a “plea-agreement’ ­ you
can’t do a thing about it. What good is “a right” ­ what does
the term even mean if you have an obligation to allow jack-boots to
violate your so-called “rights”? It makes the term absolutely
meaningless!

To
be bunt if you have the right to do “A” it means that if someone
tries to stop you from doing “A”, even if he has a badge and a
piece of ‘politician-scribble’ and that’s called “law” on
his side: You have the right to use whatever amount of force that is
necessary to resist that person. That’s what it means to have “an
unalienable-right”.

If
you have the unalienable-right to speak your mind, a-la First
Amendment—then if all else fails, you have the right to kill
government-agents who try to shut you up.

If
you have the unalienable-right to be armed—then if all else fails
you have the right to kill government agents who try to disarm you.

If
you have the right to not be subjected to unreasonable searches and
seizures then if all else fails, you have the right to kill
government agents who try to inflict those upon you.

Those
who are proud to be law-abiding don’t like to hear this and don’t
like to think about this—but what’s the alternative?

If
you do not have the right to forcibly-resist so-called
“legal-injustice’ that logically implies that you have an
obligation to allow government agents to do absolutely ANYTHING THEY
WANT TO YOU ­ your home, your family, your neighbors and so on.
Really there are only two choices. You are a slave; the property of
politicians without any rights at all or you have the right to
violently-resist governmentattempts
to oppress you. There can be no other option.

Of
course on a practical-level, openly resisting the gang called
government is usually very hazardous to one’s health. But there’s
a big-difference between obeying for the sake of self-preservation,
which is often necessary and rational, and feeling a moral-obligation
to going along with whatever the ruling-class wants to do to
you—which is pathetic and insane.

Most
of the incomprehensible-atrocities that have occurred throughout
history were due in large-part to that when most people answer
“NEVER” to the question of “When Should You Shoot a Cop”. The
correct answer is: “When Evil is Legal, become a criminal! When
OPPRESSION is enacted as LAW, become a law-breaker. And when those
actively-violating the innocent have badges, become a cop-killer.

So
the next time you hear of a police officer “being killed in the
line of duty” take a moment to consider the very real possibility
that ‘maybe’ in that case ‘the law-enforcer’ was the bad-guy
and the cop-killer was the good guy.”

k)
Remember that in the courts of this place since at least 2005, cops
have not been prosecuted for any of the thousands of innocent people
that they have routinely murdered, supposedly in the line of “their
official-duties.” And since 2005, at least, no one here can any
longer ever believe anything that any cop has sworn to!

“As
it happens that has been the case more often than not throughout
human history.